Following on from Nick Sampson's comments about seeding... I think that there should have been crossover games, as the seedings weren't brilliant.
I'd also like to mention an idea I heard this weekend: Have a Tour 0 to give accurate seeding for Tour B Teams. Seeding seems notoriously difficult, especially if that information is 8 months out of date (from an event that not all the teams may have attended). This would produce more accurate seeding information for B Tour 1 and would also provide an additional tour event for B Tour teams, which personally I would appreciate. >From my memories (vague and open to error), one reason to reduce the number of Tours, was because the A Tour teams felt they had too many events. I don't remember the B Tour teams feeling the same. How does that sound? Possum p.s. Below is the original point that Nick made. --- nick sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > However, I was suprised that the first tour event of the > year had a schedule > that seemed to be based on having seadings correctly done > - i believe they > were done on last yrs nationals - and to make top 8 you > had to win your > group with no crossovers for teams that had come 2nd in > their pool - > especially the 2 unfortunate teams that ended up with > fire 2 in their group! ----- Fight back spam! Download the Blue Frog. http://www.bluesecurity.com/register/s?user=ZGFycm9jaF9yZWlkMTUzNg%3D%3D ___________________________________________________________ All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ranulf.net/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp
